The Restoration of Rome (Peter Heather, 2013)

I had no idea what a cut-up Peter Heather could be. The last time I read a book with such a wry tone, it was James O'Donnell's Ruin of the Roman Empire, which covered a part of the same time period this book did. Maybe there is just something inherently funny about the Ostrogothic kingdom? This book takes a more expansive view than O'Donnell's, not only considering Theoderic's kingdom, but also Justinian's Byzantine East Roman Empire, Charlemagne's "Holy" "Roman" "Empire", and the papacy as attempts to "restore" the Roman Empire.

Theoderic, being the most local, had the first stab at achieving this. Although we think of the Goths as hardcore barbarians (or kids who wear black clothes and heavy makeup) they weren't totally uncouth, and just as it wasn't built in a day, Rome (and the Romans) didn't wink out of existence in 476. Therefore, the Goths, particularly the Ostrogoths (or "eastern" Goths) who settled in Italy, absorbed a good deal of Roman culture simply by virtue of geography. O'Donnell, in particular, asserts that Theoderic had a good thing going (while Heather is less certain), until Justinian came out of the East and effectively squashed the Ostrogothic Kingdom in the sixth century. However, the Byzantines were spreading themselves awfully thin trying to tamp down the Vandals and Ostrogoths, leaving their eastern front vulnerable. Ultimately, as Heather puts it so well, Justinian's grand plans to restore the Roman Empire transformed the Byzantine Empire from a world power to a regional power, losing well over half its territory within a century of the initial Italian conquests. In the aftermath of these two failed attempts, the Franks, whose stock continued to rise, finally rose to the notion of playing the role of restorers. Unfortunately, the Franks' success probably wasn't destiny, but rather the good fortune of successive uncontested heirs, from Pippin through Louis the Pious. Unfortunately the return of big royal families and health children turned the whole project into a bit of a mess, rendering the Holy Roman Empire rather inert just a century after Charlemange's coronation. So what is left but the papacy, to be the heroic restorer of the Roman Empire?

Perhaps because I'm still fresh off a church history course, but I'm not sure I completely buy into Heather's claims that the papacy (by the 12th century) represented a restored Roman Empire. Sure, there were some good times, especially around the time of Innocent III, but let us not forget that in the time period following this book would include famous low points like the near-execution of Pope Boniface VIII at the hands of the king of France and the Avignon papacy that followed. This doesn't exactly scream Roman Empire except at perhaps its lowest points. So, perhaps Rome was "restored", but that moment didn't last. However, as the Ostrogoths, the Byzantines, and the Holy Roman Empire have all since faded away, while the papacy now maintains a global presence, perhaps it isn't entirely incorrect to speak of a restoration of a sort.

My copy of this book was a gift, and it was the British edition, no less. As Heather is British and it isn't written for children, I don't think the American edition is much more different than its cover. As it targets a general readership, the book is readily available at most public libraries, and since it does have a good measure of academic value, some college libraries have wisely acquired it as well.